On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:27:15 -0500, "Ridder, Fred" <fred.ridder at intel.com> wrote:
>The point is that you tag a UI element as a UI element because >it is a UI element. You make it bold (or whatever) at a later point >in the process based on how you choose to format the semantically >tagged elements for a given deliverable. Excellent point! I totally agree, and use that for character formats at every opportunity. You wind up with more formats, many of which are specified identically, but that's a small price to pay. You can do the same with paragraph formats, too. But you can do all that in UNstructured docs just as easily as in structured. Maybe *more* easily, when you factor in the time to set up your structure, and to modify it when you make changes, which is major. I've only been able to identify one situation in which structured Frame can do this better than unstructured, and that's when you'd want nested element tags within a paragraph, since you cam't nest character formats. (There are easy workarounds for creating the equivalent of nested paragraph formats, such as using start/end formats and/or markers.) OTOH, I have yet to see a non-hypothetical case where such nested char formats were really needed... Structured Frame is designed for large pubs groups where standard document designs are required, perhaps for ISO 9000, perhaps for other corporate policy reasons. For smaller groups, and especially for lone writers, the setup costs (time and consultants) are likely to exceed the benefits, much like a CMS (Content Management System) can. There are excellent consultants around, many on this list, for whom it is a breeze. If you decide to go this way, hire one. It will prevent much anguish and hair loss. -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. <jeremy at omsys.com> http://www.omsys.com/
